Brien v. Pittman & co.
Brien v. Pittman & co.
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court—That there was error in proceeding to decree against the ab
The court is further of opinion, that it was error to decree a sale of the lands until bond with good security in double the value of the lands had been filed. The law which requires a valuation of the lands by discreet commissioners acting under oath, was intended to furnish the court with the evidence by which complete indemnity could be provided for the defendant, in the event of the decree being afterwards set aside. The measure of such indemnity is not the amount of the debt decreed, but the value of the land sold and possibly sacrificed. Though where the debt is small and the property valuable, it is in the power of, and may be proper for, the court to direct the sale of one or more of separate tracts, or of a portion of an entire tract, if a portion can be sold without material injury to the residue, of which fact the court should be satisfied; yet, in all cases, bond should be required in double the value of the land actually decreed to be sold.
The court is further of opinion, that under the discretion vested by our statute in the courts, as a general rule, real property of value should be sold on a reasonable credit, unless under very peculiar circumstances; and that nothing appearing in the record to take this case out of the general rule, it was error to decree a sale for cash.
Therefore, Decree reversed with costs, and cause remanded <fcc.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- J. & H. Brien v. Pittman & co.
- Status
- Published